Topic: Castlevania - The Plot Hole Thread

[Archangel]

Why did Dracula came back as a ghost in CoD instead of just having a normal body like all of his other ressurections? Any reason for that aside from just cuz?

Maybe Draculas Spirit/Remains or whatever weren´t ready for a full blown resurrection? Remember, it was all planned by Death to use a Devil Forgemasters Body as his new Host - he, as Dracs closest Servant and Grim Reaper should know it best.

Oh, I believe this was also the case in OoE, and Barlowe was used as a host.           

Indeed, indeed....  honestly, I found that one quite irritating. Before watching Barlowes Bestiary discription, I believed Dracula inhabited his original body. Maybe Barlowe had let him use his body because of that magic seal that was set upon his soul (which, as far as I know, prevented him to resurrect again... not sure about that one, though)

[Nagumo]

Ah, good answers but Dracula was revived in SotN only 5 years after his last major ressurection, in CoD he was revived 3 years after his he was first killed, there is only a difference of 2 years yet he still has his own body in Symphony.

How does that work?            
 

[Archangel]

I never thought of Draculas Final Form in Symphony as a real resurrection.... Alucard defeated Shaft in that strange room in the center of the castle (they reused this in HoD.... I think it is some link to the Chaos Realm)....und Dracula suddenly appears.

He doesn´t even appear in his human form from the beginning - more of a jumble of creatures.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/castlevania/images/1/17/Sotn-drac-finalsprite.PNG

We don´t even know exactly WHY he´s coming back... perhabs he sensed the presence of his son?

But back to topic: He doesn´t even do much in this state... casting some spells and summoning some monsters to heal himself.... and to be honest, he was kinda easy.... further implying (imo), that he wasn´t fully resurrected... (even though it´s non-canon, wasn´t Judgements Alucard wondering if he could beat his father again at full strength?)

Well, but that´s just my opinion/theory

[Nagumo]

Hmm, I've heard some theories before about Dracula not really reviving in Symphony. I find that very interesting but didn't Shaft down right say that he was going to ressurect him?  It would be a bit far stretched to assume that he was just kidding.   
                 

[Archangel]

I can´t remember the exact wording in the DXC Version of Symphony, but yeah, it seems like Shaft was going to resurrect his master right from the start (at least in the orig. Version) Oo

*after being defeated by Alucard* "...bu... but my goal is achieved... Count Dracula has come to purify this corrupt world with the searing flames of chaos!" *end of epicness*

I´m kind of confused now O_o At first, Shaft corrupted Richter and made him Lord of Castlevania... to kill off all the Vampire Hunters who could oppose him since he´s the strongest....
And then, when Richter´s free again, he plans to make Alucard the new Lord, after killing his softer, human side.... and then, after this plan fails, too, he declares he wanted to resurrect Dracula all along? What´s the point in replacing the strongest Vampire Hunter in the Belmont Bloodline with Dracula, who could be "simply" defeated by the next Belmont who´s available? O_o (I hope you know were I´m getting at)

Oh, almost forgot: Considering all of this, this may BE Draculas actual Body... just not at his full strength just like in PoR (well... not quite... here, he has enough power to transform into this.... thing *g*)

Oh, all those Plot holes! So confusing xD

[darkwzrd4]

I can´t remember the exact wording in the DXC Version of Symphony, but yeah, it seems like Shaft was going to resurrect his master right from the start (at least in the orig. Version) Oo

*after being defeated by Alucard* "...bu... but my goal is achieved... Count Dracula has come to purify this corrupt world with the searing flames of chaos!" *end of epicness*

I´m kind of confused now O_o At first, Shaft corrupted Richter and made him Lord of Castlevania... to kill off all the Vampire Hunters who could oppose him since he´s the strongest....
And then, when Richter´s free again, he plans to make Alucard the new Lord, after killing his softer, human side.... and then, after this plan fails, too, he declares he wanted to resurrect Dracula all along? What´s the point in replacing the strongest Vampire Hunter in the Belmont Bloodline with Dracula, who could be "simply" defeated by the next Belmont who´s available? O_o (I hope you know were I´m getting at)

Oh, almost forgot: Considering all of this, this may BE Draculas actual Body... just not at his full strength just like in PoR (well... not quite... here, he has enough power to transform into this.... thing *g*)

Oh, all those Plot holes! So confusing xD

First in SotN:
Richter is made "Lord of the Castle" as a way to stall until the resurrection of Dracula was complete and he was at full power.  Same thing goes for Shaft's intention for Alucard at the end of the game.  Even though Alucard beat Shaft, there was still enough time for Dracula to resurrect.  The fact is that he wasn't at full power.  Hence, the reason he fought in a demon form from the start of the battle.  The demon forms are stronger than his normal form.

[Archangel]

In Reply to #20

Aahh... now I understand... after hearing the Shaft Conversation since quite some time, it seemed like the whole "making Belmont the Castles Lord" was something that should´ve been more than some temporary solution. Thanks for shedding some light on that, wizard.


Hhmmm... Plot Holes... ah, yes: What about Elisabeth Bartley? How can she be Draculas Niece? Even if you´re not leaving LoI out (since Bloodlines came way before it), she was born roughly 100 years later Oo It´s bothering me every time I play Bloodlines

[Nagumo]

Well, Elizabeth Bartley isn't the real life Elizabeth Bathory so she doesn't necessarily have to be born in the 15th century (like her real life counterpart). If IGA uses the Power Retconnance he could make her the niece of Mathias, which would be pretty interesting.

I was checking out Bloodlines' entry in the Japanese timeline once, and interestingly enough, they described Elizabeth as someone only claiming to be Dracula's niece (because...?).                     

[Archangel]

She could´ve just been pretending? Interesting. About the why: Maybe Immortality made her crazy and she´s just making things up. Dunno.

And Dracula is like: "Oh, okay, whatever you say, it´s all right als long as you bring me back to life"

[Lumas]

Now that Dracula has his own origins within Castlevania there is no need to borrow from Bram's Novel since it contradicts everything now. I mean in that interview with IGA in 05 he pretty much stated that Mathias took the name Dracula, not Vlad Dracula Tepes III. I wonder if they will retcon Quincy from the the time line and just use the Morris last name as sort of an "ode" to Bram.

[DragonSlayr81]

Now that Dracula has his own origins within Castlevania there is no need to borrow from Bram's Novel since it contradicts everything now. I mean in that interview with IGA in 05 he pretty much stated that Mathias took the name Dracula, not Vlad Dracula Tepes III. I wonder if they will retcon Quincy from the the time line and just use the Morris last name as sort of an "ode" to Bram.

Actually, from the NP interview(from the NP issue with PoR on the cover), IGA acknowledges Quincy Morris:

Nintendo Power: Any thoughts or hints when we'll see the game that takes place in 1999 and shows Dracula's final downfall at the hands of Julius Belmont?

IGA: I hope I can work on that story for a future project. Not only the game that takes place in 1999, but revisiting Quincy Morris. I still haven't had the chance to expand on the story with Quincy Morris.

I doubt Quincy would be written out of the series, as would the events of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

[Lumas]

Actually, from the NP interview(from the NP issue with PoR on the cover), IGA acknowledges Quincy Morris:

I doubt Quincy would be written out of the series, as would the events of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

That was theoretically speaking for the future since they have retconned previous things in the story like Dracula's age for one.

[Nagumo]

I don't that and Dracula's age are the same thing though. Besides, Dracula's current age is only 60 years off which I think is pretty forgiveable. 

       

[MeSako]

I don't that and Dracula's age are the same thing though. Besides, Dracula's current age is only 60 years off which I think is pretty forgiveable. 

How did you calculate that?

He died in 1999 thats for sure..
Dracula was "created" in the 11th century, (since the game,according to the game intro, takes place at this time). I found a wikipedia page claiming it to take place at 1094. (confimation please)
But then.. how old was Mathias when he became Dracula??

[Nagumo]

32